Declining importance of the two major political partie

This topic has expert replies
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 14
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2009 4:13 pm
We have heard a good deal in recent years about the declining importance of the two major political parties. It is the mass media, we are told, that decide the outcome of elections, not the power of the parties. But it is worth noting that no independent or third-party candidate has won any important election in recent years, and in the last nationwide campaign, the two major parties raised and spent more money than ever before in support of their candidates and platforms. It seems clear that reports of the imminent demise of the two-party system are premature at best.
1. Which of the following is an assumption made in the argument above?
(A) The amount of money raised and spent by a political party is one valid criterion for judging the influence of the party.
(B) A significant increase in the number of third-party candidates would be evidence of a decline in the importance of the two major parties.
(C) The two-party system has contributed significantly to the stability of the American political structure.
(D) The mass media tend to favor an independent or third-party candidate over a candidate from one of the two major parties.
(E) The mass media are relatively unimportant in deciding the outcome of most elections.

Can somebody explain the line of reasoning here..
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 211
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 12:17 pm
Thanked: 12 times
GMAT Score:680

by 4seasoncentre » Wed Apr 29, 2009 8:32 pm
My guess is B

The passage is arguing against the idea that the media is the dominant factor in elections. As evidence it is noting the inability of 3rd parties to get elected.

Legendary Member
Posts: 2467
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2008 6:14 pm
Thanked: 331 times
Followed by:11 members

by cramya » Wed Apr 29, 2009 9:15 pm
We have heard a good deal in recent years about the declining importance of the two major political parties. It is the mass media, we are told, that decide the outcome of elections, not the power of the parties. But it is worth noting that no independent or third-party candidate has won any important election in recent years, and in the last nationwide campaign, the two major parties raised and spent more money than ever before in support of their candidates and platforms. It seems clear that reports of the imminent demise of the two-party system are premature at best.

I would go with A and here's why:


Negate A
The amount of money raised and spent by a political party is NOT one valid criterion for judging the influence of the party

If u do this the argument falls apart (one of the premises stated that is used partly in the conclusion)since the argument says that
the two major parties raised and spent more money than ever before in support of their candidates and platforms and hence It seems clear that reports of the imminent demise of the two-party system are premature at best leading to the fact that the 2m ajor parties still influence the otcomes of elections.

So this choice must be true for the conclusion to stand.

B) A significant increase in the number of third-party candidates would be evidence of a decline in the importance of the two major parties.

ELIMINATE The argument talks about the winning of thrid parties nothing to do with a significant increase in the number of third-party candidates

(C) The two-party system has contributed significantly to the stability of the American political structure.

SO WHAT We cannot say its doing that today and in no way causes the conclusion to fall part.

(D) The mass media tend to favor an independent or third-party candidate over a candidate from one of the two major parties.

If u negate it it still doesnt cause the conclusion to fall apart and in fact it can strengthen the argument. We are talking about the strength of influence of 2 major parties

IRRELEVANT


(E) The mass media are relatively unimportant in deciding the outcome of most elections.

GREAT .One more strengthen the conclusion choice we will use it another day not for this one.



Regards,
CR

User avatar
MBA Student
Posts: 1194
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 9:42 pm
Location: Paris, France
Thanked: 71 times
Followed by:17 members
GMAT Score:710

by gmat740 » Wed Apr 29, 2009 9:36 pm
(C) The two-party system has contributed significantly to the stability of the American political structure.

SO WHAT We cannot say its doing that today and in no way causes the conclusion to fall part.
Perfect explanation by Cramya.

I would like to add something.

American Political Structure is actually out of scope. It was not mentioned that we were discussing about any particular country.
Correct me if I am wrong

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 14
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2009 4:13 pm

by bend_the_rulz » Sat May 09, 2009 7:44 am
Thanks Guys..

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 197
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2014 4:03 am

by nicolette » Sun May 15, 2016 1:08 pm
choice C should be the correct choice

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 100
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2014 11:14 am

by Brad.C » Sun May 15, 2016 1:44 pm
I am pretty sure that the right answer is A.